Apple employs 4 of the top 5 highest paid execs in the US

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Four of the top five highest paid executives in the U.S. work at Apple, and none of them are the company's chief executive officer, Tim Cook.

Execs


Apple's Bob Mansfield, Bruce Sewell, Jeff Williams and Peter Oppenheimer were all among the top corporate earners in 2012, according to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission data cited by Bloomberg on Monday. Most of their pay came from stock-based compensation rather than base salary.

Mansfield was the highest-paid of the group, receiving $85.5 million in 2012. The company's senior vice president of its Technologies group announced last June that he would retire, but Mansfield was eventually convinced to stay at the company.

Reports last year claimed that Mansfield was given an "exorbitant" payout that convinced him to stay with a new two-year deal. At the time it was claimed that Cook "nearly witnessed an insurrection" after Mansfield announced his retirement and his replacement, Dan Riccio, was announced.

After Mansfield, the next highest paid on Apple's team was Sewell, the company's general counsel and senior vice president of Legal and Government Affairs. He earned $69 million in 2012, ranking him third among executives on the S&P 500.

Just behind him with a $68.7 million payday last year was Williams, who serves as the company's senior vice president of Operations. Williams took that position in 2010 after more than a decade with Apple.

Finally, the fifth-highest-paid S&P 500 executive in 2012 was Oppenheimer, who serves as Apple's chief financial officer. He took in $68.6 million in total compensation last year.

The top corporate earner was Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle, who earned $96.2 million. In contrast, Apple's CEO Cook earned $4.17 million in 2012, following the $378 million restricted stock package he netted in 2011.
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 113
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Good for them.
  • Reply 2 of 113
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member


    Happy Income Tax Birthday!  You're looking good for 100...  NOT!


     


    Now pay your fair share slackers! image


    /


    /

  • Reply 4 of 113
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member


    There are blokes making $85m/year? Man I really need to get my act together :)

  • Reply 5 of 113
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    What's the best college to major in CEO? Why was that degree not offered when I spoke to my high school counselor?
  • Reply 6 of 113
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post



    What's the best college to major in CEO? Why was that degree not offered when I spoke to my high school counselor?


    I think you want a Stanford or Harvard MBA.

  • Reply 7 of 113
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member


    "none of them are the company's chief executive officer"


     


    Basic grammar, people.  (I know that "none is" sounds weird, but what can you do.  Think of is as "not one" then you'll get it right.)

  • Reply 8 of 113

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by malax View Post


    "none of them are the company's chief executive officer"


     


    Basic grammar, people.  (I know that "none is" sounds weird, but what can you do.  Think of is as "not one" then you'll get it right.)



    Was that a question?

  • Reply 9 of 113
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Curious to know if all of Apple's executives got similar grants? We only know about the ones they disclosed in their proxy statement, so we have no figures on Schiller, Ive, Cue, Federighi or Riccio. If they all got something similar it would be more like 9 out of 10 highest paid execs. :lol:
  • Reply 10 of 113
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Was that a question?

    No. It's a colloquialism.
  • Reply 11 of 113
    zoffdinozoffdino Posts: 192member


    People, most of those compensation are spread over a 10 years period, but for tax purposes, they have to declare the income as this year's. Did anybody honestly believe that Cook gets a 90% salary reduction for this year?


     


    Anyway, what do they have to show for the humongous compensation they got? Stock tanked nearly 40% and none of them blinked an eye.

  • Reply 12 of 113
    Oops... Deleted. (Misunderstood).
  • Reply 13 of 113
    Most of it is likely in the form of options and stock grants, probably underwater (as is Ellison's).

    That said, I am not not sure that either Sewell or Oppenheimer deserve much of a payday.
  • Reply 14 of 113
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by zoffdino View Post

    Did anybody honestly believe that Cook gets a 90% salary reduction for this year?


     


    Is that what was stated publicly? If so, yes, he did. Because you sort of, you know, CAN'T DO IT otherwise.





    Anyway, what do they have to show for the humongous compensation they got?



     


    The most successful devices and computers of all time, marketshare that just. keeps. increasing., continued chart-topping customer service and satisfaction, and profit out the wazoo.


     


    You know, basically the continuation of the most successful string of product releases of any company in human history.






     Stock tanked nearly 40% and none of them blinked an eye.



     


    See, that's why Apple is successful and no one else is. This. Couldn't. Be. Any. Less. Significant.

  • Reply 15 of 113
    normmnormm Posts: 570member
    How about hedge fund managers? David Tepper, founder of hedge fund firm Appaloosa Management, made $2.2 billion last year.
  • Reply 16 of 113
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member


    Just for interest, a list of other salaries at Apple:


     


    http://www.businessinsider.com/the-highest-paying-jobs-at-apple-ranked-2012-5?op=1

  • Reply 17 of 113
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,984member
    Is it just me or does Bob Mansfield look like Bob Paulson formerly of Project Mayhem?
  • Reply 18 of 113
    jdnc123jdnc123 Posts: 233member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Is that what was stated publicly? If so, yes, he did. Because you sort of, you know, CAN'T DO IT otherwise.


     


    The most successful devices and computers of all time, marketshare that just. keeps. increasing., continued chart-topping customer service and satisfaction, and profit out the wazoo.


     


    You know, basically the continuation of the most successful string of product releases of any company in human history.


     


    See, that's why Apple is successful and no one else is. This. Couldn't. Be. Any. Less. Significant.



    >>You know, basically the continuation of the most successful string of product releases of any company in human history.


     


    See, that's why Apple is successful and no one else is. This. Couldn't. Be. Any. Less. Significant.>>


     


    All done under the watch of Steve Jobs.  By themselves, none of these executives have anything to show that they can or will be successful in the future, which partly explains why the stock has dropped like it has.  The market has no confidence in any of these overpaid employees and certainly no confidence in Tim Cook.  They were handed the most valuable tech company and most valuable company period in the world and have managed to lose more value than anyone could ever dream.  Yet despite the value of the company at 2yr lows with the market at multi-year highs, none of these executives want to use their own money to buy Apple stock, which is very telling.  Why should investors buy if the company or insiders won't (and don't give me the crap about the 10b buyback to offset options).  Company doesn't think the stock is a good value and has to be a reason.

  • Reply 19 of 113
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zoffdino View Post


    Stock tanked nearly 40% and none of them blinked an eye.



    In an ideal world the stock price would reflect the fundamentals of a company, and to the extent it does you can pin it on the execs, but you see there are these people called speculators...

  • Reply 20 of 113
    ascii wrote: »
    zoffdino wrote: »
    Stock tanked nearly 40% and none of them blinked an eye.
    In an ideal world the stock price would reflect the fundamentals of a company, and to the extent it does you can pin it on the execs, but you see there are these people called speculators...

    That's not a very persuasive argument. If the stock was selling at $700 (as it was), do you think anyone would seriously begrudge these salaries? Indeed, in that scenario, would you have pinned it on the executives or the stock market?
Sign In or Register to comment.